Don't Be Distracted...Focus on Making Reform Permanent!

In our era, a key progressive goal is to so distract decision-makers in the White House, Congress, and the pro-limited government movement, that we fail to seize this opportunity to focus on making permanent reforms, especially constitutional reforms, that will change the trajectory of government growth over the next generation.

There are some very smart progressives who realize that the most dangerous part of this Republican coalition, is NOT just Republican control of the White House or Republican majorities in Congress.

Democrats have dealt with those before and they know that the executive orders, budgets, tax policies and laws these majorities enact are only temporary, until the next Democratic super-majorities which come periodically, about once a generation.

What Democrats and progressives REALLY fear is the combination of Republican Congressional majorities, control of the White House AND majorities in the legislatures of 33, almost 2/3, of the states plus split, or near majority control in at least 5 more states and the power they offer for constitutional reform.

The emerging new technology of constitutional reform, refining the strategy of pressure from the states and the public that has resulted in the enactment of 12 of the 27 Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, could give 2/3 of the states who agreed on the text of an Amendment that was also popular with voters, the power to force Congress to propose that Amendment or something very similar.

States could force Congress to act  without resorting to a convention that is still a very divisive issue in American politics.

It was pressure from the states and the public that forced Congress to propose the Bill of Rights and more recently Presidential term limits.  It could be done again.

If there were active Presidential, Congressional, business community, or widespread grassroots leadership for such an effort to mobilize states to force Congress to propose an Amendment, it could well succeed.

And success for almost any Amendment would transform the balance of state and federal power, taking power away from Washington and giving it back to states and the people, where most voters believe it belongs.

Creating a viable path to taking power out of Washington would totally frustrate progressives' long term plan to create an even more powerful higher tax, higher regulation, higher spending federal government over the next generation.

Especially dangerous for advocates of bigger government is the possibility that pro-limited government forces will find a way to permanently curb the power of the so-called "deep state", often referred to as the administrative state.

The power of the "administrative state" now allows a President to, in many ways, "rule by decree" reinterpreting laws passed years ago, to essentially create new laws without the consent of Congress.  Using that power is a key part of progressive strategy for imposing their economic and cultural agenda on the country the next time they elect a President, without the need for approval by Congress.

Free from the fear of arbitrary federal regulation, the value of assets in energy, agriculture, natural resources, manufacturing, financial markets, technology, and small business could skyrocket, and our rate of economic growth and job creation could double.

But the current power of federal regulators and the near-certainty of a future progressive president who will exploit that power threaten our hopes for high economic growth, our resulting ability to responsibly fund both our defense needs and a safety net for the poor and elderly, our 2nd Amendment rights, our religious freedom, and the very checks and balances on the abuse on federal power that were intended by the authors of our Constitution,

That is the reason that the effort, now unanimously  backed by the RNC with the approval of the White House, and by Resolutions in 26 state legislative chambers, to mobilize states to persuade Congress to propose the "Regulation Freedom Amendment" to require that Congress approve major new federal regulations is so important.

With just a little more support and momentum, this effort could become one of the major issues of 2018, uniting libertarians, conservatives of all kinds, and a majority of the public around the idea that the people and their elected representatives, not unelected bureaucrats in Washington should make the rules that govern us.

That issue and the fact that most Democrats in Washington want send more power to Washington, and give more power to un-elected bureaucrats, things most voters oppose. could totally change the dynamics of the 2018 election.

And that is why the Regulation Freedom Amendment and the effort to "end regulation without representation" deserve your active support, including your time, your resources, and the contacts you have built up over your years of work and living.

We need people at all levels  to contact elected officials urging support for the Amendment, to attend and speak at conferences and political meetings around the nation, and to help us raise the money we need to grow this effort.

If some of your passion and energy were directed towards finding others who would like to be actively involved in this effort to "drain the swamp", you could have a decisive impact at a decisive moment in the effort to reverse the trend towards a more powerful, centralized and abusive federal government.

The historic "triple 'White House/Congressional/State Legislative majorities and the unique opportunity they presents may not come again for a generation, or ever.  We must take advantage of it now or we will look back with regret on the opportunity that we missed!

If you want to discuss, call or email me.

Roman Buhler

Director

The Madison Coalition

202 255 5000

www.RegulationFreedom.Org

Trump Backs Off Promise To Release All Suppressed JFK Documents Today; Permits Partial Release

From:  Justice Integrity Project 

by Andrew Kreig

In a chaotic chapter of government efforts to suppress research into the evidence regarding President Kennedy's 1963 assassination, President Trump on Oct. 26 suddenly backed away from his promises this week to comply with a 1992 Congressional law and release all remaining documents related to the assassination.

The president released in full via the National Archives website at about 7:30 p.m. some 2,891 remaining documents after a conference call with news reporters beginning at 5:46 p.m. This followed a day in which many in the public long focused on the document release were left wondering until after normal business hours what was happening.

Update: One expert suggested privately to fellow researchers that his preliminary review of the documents and the initial media coverage indicates vast confusion in the news coverage, as follows:

Most journalists who mentioned the numbers of documents in their initial reporting implied that the released documents, 2,891, came from the trove of some 3,100 that had been expected to be released in full on Oct. 26. Instead, the expert said, at least 98 percent of the released documents appeared to be from the larger universe of some 30,000 documents that had been previously released with partial redactions.

In other words, the new information may be far less than implied by initial news reports, even those from major news organizations. A further implication is that staff disorganization in the White House must have been at a monumental level for a 25-year project regarding the murder of a president in broad daylight in what's been called "The Crime of the Century" to crash into such confusion and secrecy on its long-anticipated deadline day. 

The White House issued a statement saying that it was giving federal agencies until March 12 to register objections to remaining documents.The White House scheduling a decision on the those objections by April 26, with some documents to be released on a rolling basis in the meantime.

Earlier in the week, Trump had promised compliance and transparency on the documents. They were supposed to have been released by Oct. 26 as part of a process begun after the U.S. Senate and House each passed by unanimous votes in 1992 the so-called "JFK Act" to release all documents absent compelling national security reasons.

This editor has been monitoring these developments closely for years via the Justice Integrity Project and Citizens Against Political Assassinations (CAPA). Along with more than 200 other reporters and interested parties, I joined a White House conference call that began at 5:46 p.m. (EST) whereby officials described how and why they were only partially complying with their own and congressional timetables. Also, I undertook a number of interviews this week with U.S. and international outlets to describe the importance of developments.

The news is summarized in an appendix to this column. It contains a number of news stories and commentaries arranged in reverse chronological order. Another appendix includes our so-far 43-part "Readers Guide to the JFK Assassination," which helps show how virtually all major U.S. media continue to support the controversial 1964 Warren Report claiming that former U.S. Marine Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone to kill Kennedy in Dallas.

Virtually all major media also couch their coverage in terms of smearing researchers with the term "conspiracy theorists," a term popularized by the CIA in the 1960s to discredit critics of the Warren Report, previously declassified CIA documents show.

Especially notable among the columns this week are those by JFK research experts John M. Newman, Dan Hardway, and Jacob Hornberger. Important also is a  news story by the Pittsburgh-Post Gazette in which noted forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril H. Wecht, chairman of CAPA, described medical evidence proving that the accused JFK assassin Oswald could not alone have killed Kennedy, as alleged by the 1964 Warren Commission.

Wecht has been a leader in arranging with CAPA and the South Texas College of Law / Houston a unique mock trial, State of Texas vs. Lee Harvey Oswald, that will showcase at the school top medical experts discussing evidence. Proponents from CAPA believe the evidence will show conclusively on the basis of scientific facts that Oswald could not alone have killed Kennedy, in contrast to claims by government authorities and the vast majority of news reporters..Details of the mock trial are here. Many researchers believe also that Oswald did not fire any shots, but such a conclusion is not necessary to raise doubts about the professed certitude of authorities that he acted alone.

Newman, a historian and national intelligence expert, argues that Oswald was an undercover intelligence operative and that agencies have tried through the years to hide embarrassing information. Hardway, an attorney and former staff investigator for Congress into Oswald's alleged activities, argues in his column that intelligence agencies and the news media have concocted the smear "conspiracy theory" to deter honest investigations into the Kennedy death.

Hornberger, leader of the Libertarian think tank Future of Freedom Foundation and also an attorney and a book publisher, predicted early this week that Trump would back away from his promise to release all documents. Hornberger alleged days ago that Trump, as deal-maker, likely promised transparency in order to frighten secrets-keepers at the FBI and CIA to make a secret deal to help protect his own secrets and viability despite ongoing federal probes into his 2016 presidential campaign and subsequent actions. 

Trump's White House statement contradicting his earlier statements said in part:

The American public expects -- and deserves -- its Government to provide as much access as possible to the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records (records) so that the people may finally be fully informed about all aspects of this pivotal event. Therefore, I am ordering today that the veil finally be lifted. 

At the same time, executive departments and agencies (agencies) have proposed to me that certain information should continue to be redacted because of national security, law enforcement, and foreign affairs concerns.  I have no choice --today -- but to accept those redactions rather than allow potentially irreversible harm to our Nation's security. 

To further address these concerns, I am also ordering agencies to re-review each and every one of those redactions over the next 180 days.  At the end of that period, I will order the public disclosure of any information that the agencies cannot demonstrate meets the statutory standard for continued postponement of disclosure under section 5(g)(2)(D) of the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 (44 U.S.C. 2107 note) (the "Act"). 

A CIA spokesperson added:

We welcome the President’s directive to conduct further review of the records in the JFK Assassination Records Collection to identify any additional information that can be released, while still protecting our officers, partners, sources, and methods.CIA has been working diligently to release to the public as much CIA information as possible from the collection.

Pursuant to the JFK Assassination Records Act of 1992, more than 87,000 CIA records were identified as falling within the scope of the collection.

Of those, CIA has already released more than 69,000 records to the public in full, without redaction. Every single one of the approximately 18,000 remaining CIA records in the collection will ultimately be released, with no document withheld in full. 

While some of these 18,000 records currently contain targeted redactions, the information redacted represents less than one percent of the total CIA information in the collection.

CIA’s current redactions were undertaken with the intent to protect information in the collection whose disclosure would harm national security -- including the names of CIA assets and current and former CIA officers, as well as specific intelligence methods and partnerships that remain viable to protecting the nation today. 

The news coverage from mainstream media focused heavily on reporters' claim that "conspiracy theorists" dominate the debate and steer the public away from what the reporters consistently claim is Oswald's guilt. The news organizations bring forward for the most part the same few supposed experts who with near-unanimity allege that Oswald in fact killed Kennedy, acting alone.

CNN -- whose parent company Time-Life played a key role in suppressing the Zapruder film that provided contrary evidence to the mainstream narrative that Oswald killed Kennedy with three shots from the rear -- exemplified the questionable news coverage the evening of Oct. 26. CNN's commentators repeatedly mocked critics of the official narrative. The anchors and experts (clearly cherry-picked to reiterate the death's official narrative) framed their discussion around whether delays in providing evidence would fuel "conspiracy" thinking. That stressed the commentators' theme that the most important documents in the case were those involving Oswald's purported Communist sympathies.

Our immediate goal with this column is to report the evening's breaking news ASAP.

Future reports here will follow up in more depth with analysis of why the U.S. mainstream news media remain so committed to reiterating a narrative that the American public reject by large majorities, according to public opinion polls showing that between 60 and about 75 percent of Americans reject the Warren Report's main conclusion -- and thus the standard news accounts by media elites.

As a further preview, we note that we now know conclusively that the CIA led the way in a secret propaganda campaign against the American public and in violation of the CIA's charter to manipulate the nation's news media to popularize the smear "conspiracy theorist." This is shown by a previously declassified 1967 CIA document, known as "CIA Dispatch 1035-960."

The 50-page CIA memo instructed its agents to contact their media contacts and disparage as "conspiracy theorists" those who were criticizing the Warren Commission findings that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK and acted alone. The 1967 document is here in the original, and here in reformatted text of its summary. Minutes of CIA meeting that same year indicated fear that New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison would win a conviction in his murder conspiracy case naming International Trade Mart executive Clay Shaw as being at the center of a plot to murder the president.

Shaw, the only person ever indicted in connection with the JFK murder, was acquitted after he denied that he was involved with the CIA and after many key prosecution witnesses died in untimely fashion.

Garrison outlined his theory of the case in video that NBC broadcast in 1967 (under rules then requiring a right of reply) in response to NBC's attacks on Garrison to thwart his prosecution. In a 27-minute address to the nation, Garrison argued in favor of a rational evaluation of evidence and against what he called a dangerous "fairy tale" being spread by the Warren Commission and powerful media about the Kennedy murder case in order to confuse the public. At the eight-minute mark or so, Garrison talks specifically about the importance of his documentary evidence -- even though he possessed only some of the four million pages of evidence declassified primarily in recent years about the assassination.

The 1991 film JFK by Oliver Stone portrayed Garrison as a truth-seeker, and led to popular pressure on Congress to order release of suppressed JFK assassination documents. Some four million pages have been released so far. These provide informed researchers fairly clear ideas of what had caused Kennedy's murder and why it still matters.

To be continued. 

Toxic tensions in the heart of 'Cancer Alley'

From:  CNN

The EPA says this town has the nation's highest risk of developing cancer from air toxins. The plant emitting the toxins says otherwise. Locals are outraged.

By Victor Blackwell, Wayne Drash and Christopher Lett, CNN

Updated 7:36 PM ET, Fri October 20, 2017

EPA: Plant emits 99% of US chloroprene pollution 08:28

LaPlace, Louisiana (CNN)Geraldine Watkins sits at the kitchen table in her ranch home, rattling off the names of friends and relatives in her small Louisiana town who've died of cancer over the last 40 years.

Her grandchildren suffer an array of ailments, from skin conditions to breathing problems. Her 7-year-old great-grandson's breathing is so labored, she says, "you can feel his heart trying to jump out of his chest."

Watkins lives in the shadow of a plant that spews chloroprene -- a chemical so toxic the Environmental Protection Agency says nearby residents face the highest risk in the country of developing cancer from air toxins.  MORE

Mercury Systems Announces Safety-Certifiable Multi-Core Solution for Avionics and Communications

From:  NasDaq

NOTE:  Along with polluting industries companies such as Green Hills Software, Inc. (GHS), will find themselves mentioned in the now coming online Lincoln's Risk-Registry.  Look for announcements.  

BuiltSAFE ROCK-2 Subsystem Integrated with INTEGRITY-178 is Aligned to FACE Standard

ANDOVER, Mass., Oct. 20, 2017 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Mercury Systems, Inc. (NASDAQ:MRCY) (www.mrcy.com) announced that its BuiltSAFE™ ROCK-2 avionics subsystem is now available pre-integrated with the Green Hills Software safe and secure INTEGRITY-178 tuMP® (time-variant unified multiprocessing) real-time operating system (RTOS). INTEGRITY-178 tuMP enables the full multi-core capabilities of the ROCK-2 subsystem to be utilized for applications requiring DO-178C certification. The combined software and hardware solution is aligned with the Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE™) V2.1 Technical Standard and was demonstrated at this week's FACE Technical Interchange Meeting.  MORE

Linda, you have a lot to learn

By Melinda Pillsbury-Foster

Bloodworth-Thomason from Fellowship of the Mind

Linda Bloodworth-Thomason has a lot to learn about being free and in community with others.  Standing up for the truth is required of us as human beings.  It does not matter who it is, the truth needs to be told, both to affirm those who suffer harm and to remind those who violate the rights of others of their error.  ‘Doing the right thing,’ means all of the time, every time, not when it is convenient or emotionally easy. 

To put it plainly, she believes she can enjoy a relationship with a sexual predator and cut this off from any judgement of herself when her ‘friend’ violates the personal autonomy of someone else.  This is absurd, wishful thinking which expresses an ugly truth about Ms. Bloodworth and uncounted others. 

What about the many victims Bill Clinton has left in his wake?  What about the campaigns of destruction waged by Hillary Clinton on these victims of Bill’s sexual addiction? 

On John and Ken Show in Los Angeles, a radio talk show, their phone line, “The Moist Line,” for people to leave messages for what scum bag needs to be thrown into the proverbial dumpster this week, only two names were mentioned several times by many women.  One was Harvey Weinstein and the other was, “What about Bill Clinton?”  We have not forgotten. 

Bill and Harvey from The gateway Pundit, Harv chuckling

For you to not counsel Bill Clinton on this matter as your attorney uncle would, is to turn the hashtag, “#MeToo,” into “PoundMeToo,” probably not what you intended, but you are in the arena with a word processor and TV cameras. 

Not being believed, being discounted, dismissed, causes trauma which sends ripples of pain down the entire life of an individual.   Each of us is responsible for our own lives and can be judged when we give the semblance of honor to those whose own actions are at variance with these values when we choose to ignore this human responsibility.   

Linda, you are, as you refused to admit, a hypocrite. 

Freedom from sexual harassment is not just for women in Hollywood, it is for all of us, women and men all of our lives.  Freedom goes way beyond respect for our bodies. Our freedom includes our choices, how we live, love and work as long as we do no harm to others. 

The freedom which increased the recognized autonomy for women, minorities, yes, and for men, to choose their own paths in life, have been expensive.  That cost has been borne by women and men, many now dead, who put their lives on hold to stand up for the rights of those who could not speak for themselves or who were ignored for the reasons which a few weeks ago remained unspoken by those in the Entertainment Industry.

This could not have happened without the collusion of thousands of individuals.  It is easy to understand why so many women and men remained silent, but those reasons do not excuse them or mitigate their continued suffering.    

One tiny step has been taken, despite the overt nature of the sexual predators, male and female, operating within the Entertainment Industry.   But we remain in a world where the Equal Rights Amendment is still unratified, despite the fact most believe this has long since happened.

Linda, you have enabled a sexual predator and then attempted to evade accountability, kicking his victims to the curb.  You admitted this openly when you said, “I will be the first to admit that clearly delineated moral choices can still be painfully complex where friendship is involved. One of the best friends I will ever have and a man I love dearly, former President Bill Clinton, has certainly taxed my feminist conscience, but always without diminishing my affection. I even helped write his apology to the nation for his own sexual misconduct, was sitting next to him when he delivered it, and believe to this day it was based on something that was none of our business. And yes, some may call it hypocritical, but I confess to having had no problem warning at least three top-level Democratic operatives against allowing Harvey Weinstein to host political fundraisers. A warning that evidently (and to the glee of Fox News) fell on deaf ears.”

There is a road out of your hypocrisy.  Read on.  We need a lot more than the ratification of the ERA, as important as that is.  Hear this, there is no space in our world for protecting predators in any arena.

Explaining you were sympathetic when it cost you nothing should make you cringe.  I’m sure Ashley Judd, Rose McGowan and others in your industry are relieved.  They can more on, heal, know they are safe.  But there are others who are not safe, not one bit. 

You recounted your personal experiences in the Entertainment Industry.  It is the same in every part of our world where an elite, usually male, but not always, can dictate terms which include demanding favors, sexual or other, from those beneath them.  The relative power of the individual makes it easy to ignore obligations or make demands on those who work for them or are themselves in politics. 

Every part of the political arena, corporate life, the military, and more are subject to the same abuses.  Your silence within your own industry is mirrored in the still unresolved acts of Bill and Hillary Clinton.   

Much of my life was spent in GOP and Libertarian politics.  It was exactly the same.  As a condition of employment Ed Crane of CATO required women who worked there to have sex with him.  Crane was never a proponent of freedom but enjoyed a half-million dollars a year for manicuring issues for his employers, the Kochs.  I exposed this but no on in that arena cared much.  There is, despite that, a difference between being a Libertine and a Libertarian.     

You don’t like Donald Trump so denouncing him is easy.  Trump admitted his failing openly and apologized to his victim.   But Bill apologized to those he had not directly victimized only after being impeached.   So where is the lesson learned?  Gossip has it his behavior has not changed.  How about if we ask his Secret Service Agents?  They likely know.

Corporate Officers are also known to behave in the same way.  Ideology does not matter but power does. 

Linda, you were whining when you wrote, “As for the small screen, I myself was the creator of a man-loving, feminist show called Designing Women. We were arguably one of the most progressive, loudmouthed, female series ever — unapologetically, week after week, we showcased issues involving the objectification of women, violence against women and sexual harassment. Out of 163 episodes, we received one Emmy … for hairdressing. (It might be worth noting that Television Academy voters were 80 percent male.)”

I happen to have a partner who had some comments on your Poplar Bluff Mule memories, which play so large in Designing Women.  Your characterization for your ‘designing women,’ were your parents, descendants of the Bloodworth boys on Lester Street.  One of the boys went into law in Poplar Bluff. 

The Bloodworth boys learned about girl power from those Brake Girls who lived across Lester Street.  The Bloodworth Boys lost a fist-fight to the four Brake girls after bullying the recently fatherless sisters on the subject of racism.  Their mother had run for Butler County Clerk in an alliance between the Women’s Christian Temperance Union and the then Negro population, which took on the Klu Klux Klan, who bought the election with free drinks with the quid pro quo they would vote for the Klan candidate against the widow.  Jesse Lee Collins-Brake lost, but broke the back politically of the Klan in the Boot Heel ever after.  The young Bloodworth boys were gloating over this loss and took it as a license to bully the girls.  The Brake girls whipped their asses with their KerPow, continuing to swim with their black friends in the Black and Current Rivers. 

Everyone, Brake and Bloodworth went home with black eyes. 

To their credit, the Bloodworth boys learned their lesson and, thereafter, fought for desegregation and positive race relations the rest of their lives.  However, they did not seem to communicate to you the full source of the conflict; to not bully girls.  Now, you know and we can move on.  To exonerate yourself you need to advocate to Bill, as his ghost writer, that beyond admission of guilt, sorrow, and apology, he needs to tell the truth about his bullying and quid pro quos for sex and make restitution.  One way he and Hillary can do this is to reroute the $250.000 given to them by Harvey Weinstein and instead create the Harvey Weinstein “Endowment” and add their own millions, not as hush money, but as true restitution.  Since Bill and Hillary now control $900M, this coming after poverty when their campaign fund was down to $50,000 in March 1992, could make a dent in the ladies’ problems. 

Bill and Hillary ignored all the wisdom and solutions offered them in favor of power and money, only pretending to care about solving so many problems.    

The lives led by the Bloodworth Boys and Those Brake Girls from Poplar Bluff could solve many of the problems Americans face today.  Go back and ask your families, and some Mules.  If they don’t know, you can come ask me.  

Gun Lies the Establishment Tells You

From:  Rockwall

by Reichard White

To start with, as per the Standard Anti-Self-Defense Handbook — and using the so-far unexplained Las Vegas shooting spree as the latest platform — the usual Second Amendment scoff-laws still prominently include firearm suicides in their gun-death tally.

Thank goodness folks deprived of guns won’t use overdoses, tranquilizers-plus-booze, carbon monoxide, razor blades, poison, etc. — and bridges, tall buildings, and open windows for jumping — if they can’t get guns!

Or are the usual Congressional victim-disarmers misleading us again?

Suicide by any means, while regrettable, is a voluntary act, and those determined, gun or no gun, nearly always succeed. With that in mind, let’s put things in perspective:

The 19,392 gun suicides in the U.S. in 2010, a typical year, swamped the 11,078 firearm homicides. That is, firearm suicides amount to a whopping ~two-thirds of reported gun deaths, dwarfing all other categories combined.

Time to buy old US gold coins

So by lumping voluntary suicides in with homicides to inflate the anti-gun bogeyman — and scare the kids — the gun-grabbers are indeed trying to mislead us again.  MORE

Here’s How Much of Your Taxes Have Gone To Wars

From:  Defense One 

Previously unreported Pentagon data shows how much the average U.S. taxpayer has paid for combat operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Syria.

As of Monday, the average American taxpayer will have paid nearly $7,500 to fund the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria since the 9/11 attacks, according to previously unreported Pentagon budget data sent to Congress this summer.

This fiscal year, each U.S. taxpayers will pay about $289 for both wars, according to the Defense Department data. Next year — fiscal 2018 — that number would drop to $281 per taxpayer, if Congress were to pass the White House’s spending request unchanged, which won’t happen. And there’s another reason that number is likely to change: the Trump administration’s plan to send more American troops to Afghanistan.

Americans paid the most for the wars in 2010, an average of $767 apiece. The annual amount declined through 2016 to $204 per taxpayer, before growing again as the U.S. ramped up its airstrike campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.MORE